Fired 'Call of Duty' developers sue Activision for more than $36 million

[TroubleBound]

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare has led to legal warfare at Activision.

Jason West and Vince Zampella, the former heads of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare development studio Infinity Ward, who were fired on Monday, have filed a lawsuit against publisher Activision Blizzard Inc. alleging wrongful termination and breach of contract.

The complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on Wednesday, alleges that Santa Monica-based Activision fired the the duo in order to avoid paying them royalties on military shooter Modern Warfare 2, which was released in November and has generated more than $1 billion in retail sales.

"Activision has refused to honor the terms of its agreements with Mssrs. West and Zampella and is intentionally flouting the public policy of this State that employers must pay their employees what they have rightfully earned," the complaint states. "Instead, Activision has adopted the corporate strategy of forcing Mssrs. West and Zampella to sue for their pay -- in the hopes of either getting away with not having to pay them anything or maximizing its leverage to reduce that pay."

Spokespeople for Santa Monica-based Activision did not respond to requests for comment.

According to the complaint, after Activision acquired Infinity Ward for a total of $5 million in 2003, it signed three-year employment agreements with West and Zampella, co-founders of the Encino-based studio who most recently served as president and chief executive, respectively.

In 2008, after the release of Infinity Ward's Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, the fourth game in the series and a huge hit that has sold more than 13 million units, West and Zampella signed a contract extension through 2011. The complaint says that the extension includes additional royalties and other payments, as well as the right to operate Infinity Ward independently and to have creative control over any Modern Warfare sequels or other Call of Duty games set after the Vietnam War. (Update, 11:20 a.m.: A previous version of this post incorrectly said the contract extension was signed in 2007.)

Previous Call of Duty games without the "Modern Warfare" subtitle have been set in World War II. A sequel set for release this November being released by another Activision-owned studio, Treyarch, is said by people close to the company to be set in the Vietnam War.

The complaint states that Activision launched an investigation of West and Zampella on Feb. 3 for alleged "breaches of contract" and "violations of Activision policies." The two were then fired on Monday. The complaint states that the "notice of discharge" contained "charges that were disproved in the investigation; included events that West and Zampella were never even asked about during the investigation; identified conduct that other Activision executives engaged in with impunity; and cited 'insubordination' and alleged conduct from over a year ago."

In its annual report filed Monday, Activision said it was "concluding an internal human resources inquiry into breaches of contract and insubordination by two senior employees at Infinity Ward."

The lawsuit asks the court to rule that West and Zampella have creative control over all Modern Warfare games and that Activision may not release any Call of Duty games set after the Vietnam War without their approval and that the publisher owes them unpaid royalties and damages in excess of $36 million.

[Update, 11:57 a.m. Activision has issued the following statement in response to the lawsuit:

Activision is disappointed that Mr. Zampella and Mr. West have chosen to file a lawsuit, and believes their claims are meritless. Over eight years, Activision shareholders provided these executives with the capital they needed to start Infinity Ward, as well as the financial support, resources and creative independence that helped them flourish and achieve enormous professional success and personal wealth.

In return, Activision legitimately expected them to honor their obligations to Activision, just like any other executives who hold positions of trust in the company. While the company showed enormous patience, it firmly believes that its decision was justified based on their course of conduct and actions. Activision remains committed to the Call of Duty franchise, which it owns, and will continue to produce exciting and innovative games for its millions of fans.]---http://latimesblogs.latimes.co....html

That blows, i love my codmw2 but i hate to think i paid a bunch of thieves and none of the money went to the creative game engineers. Especially because all of the WWII versions of Call of Duty sucked, and those two were responsible for the modern ones. Sounds like they will get paid though, as long as the contract says what they say it says.

[C-Kwik]

I'd reserve judgement until it becomes known what the breach of contract allegations were. And of course what the terms in the contract are for such acts.

[dre1507]

Sooo, anyone wanna join me for a quick round?

[MellowZ32]

buy me a Xbox360 and I join you!

[dre1507]

lol, im on ps3, but i do wants a 360 too. my cuzzo had the perfect chance to get a 360 yesterday, but he bought a ps2 trying to be like me with a ps3. grrrr.

[MellowZ32]

so no xbox for me?

[dre1507]

nopers.

[MellowZ32]

[dre1507]

Aww don't cry. One day, we're gonna be so rich that we can buy all the xbox's we want. So until then, i'll be in my room playing the PS3. You can watch from outside or bring your own controller and play from outside.

[MellowZ32]

[MinisterofDOOM]

Just my speculation, but it sounds to me like the IW guys were going to go after Activision for the unpaid royalties and issues over control of the Modern Warfare name BEFORE they were fired. The firings came as a result of that (direct or indirect) and now they've tacked on wrongful termination as well.

That's how it looks to me...but I could be wrong.

I know in the past IW and Activision have had run-ins. Part of the reason there are multiple developers (now FOUR) assigned to the CoD series is that IW refused to crank out one a year, as they said they didn't think they could maintain their desired quality standard. There was some hostility over that issue as well.

And IW has expressed displeasure at the way Activision has handled the CoD franchise as a whole since bringing on Treyarch. IW felt that Activision's promotion of the two games didn't distinguish the Treyarch product from IW enough (IW is the dev who created the CoD franchise, so of course CoD titles would automatically be associated with them) and weren't happy with the idea of that product being seen as one of theirs simply through association of the name.

[4cefed]

I wonder if they realize how bad the trey arch versions suck. I love the even numbered games in the series, and I've hated 3 and 5. I will not be purchasing 7.

[dre1507]

there's another one? really?............*steps off to google*

[MinisterofDOOM]

there's another one? really?............*steps off to google*

Another what?

[RCA]

Another what?

I love the even numbered games in the series, and I've hated 3 and 5. I will not be purchasing 7.

I am guessing another CoD?? I am not interested in anything other then IW finishing this epic tale that they started with. If Activision screws this up, I will be upset...

I have absolutely NO issues with waiting 2+ years for the next version. As long as Modern Warfare 3 doesn't turn into Gran Turismo 5

[ProudNissanFreak]

^ GT5 thread has new video which came with GoW3

[IanS]

Just my speculation, but it sounds to me like the IW guys were going to go after Activision for the unpaid royalties and issues over control of the Modern Warfare name BEFORE they were fired. The firings came as a result of that (direct or indirect) and now they've tacked on wrongful termination as well.

That's how it looks to me...but I could be wrong.

I know in the past IW and Activision have had run-ins. Part of the reason there are multiple developers (now FOUR) assigned to the CoD series is that IW refused to crank out one a year, as they said they didn't think they could maintain their desired quality standard. There was some hostility over that issue as well.

And IW has expressed displeasure at the way Activision has handled the CoD franchise as a whole since bringing on Treyarch. IW felt that Activision's promotion of the two games didn't distinguish the Treyarch product from IW enough (IW is the dev who created the CoD franchise, so of course CoD titles would automatically be associated with them) and weren't happy with the idea of that product being seen as one of theirs simply through association of the name.

Im with you on this one.

I dont car how crooked a company might be, they are not stupid. They knew full well what would happen if they wrongfully terminated a high up employee. Im guessing the have a very very good reason for cutting these boys loose.

The way it sounds to me is the plaintiffs were trying to maximize their own massive incomes at the expense of Activision, and someone caught on.

Alas, it is but speculation

[LEMHEAD16]

I bet they were doing the 10th prestige glitch.

[MinisterofDOOM]

The way it sounds to me is the plaintiffs were trying to maximize their own massive incomes at the expense of Activision, and someone caught on.

Alas, it is but speculation

Actually, I was getting at exactly the opposite: I think Activision is crooked and West and Zampella were simply prepared for the treachery. Activision has a poor reputation amongst gaming's well-informed anyway. They're like EA, they buy developers and IPs, then restructure until they've got people they want staffing those projects. They have no respect for pre-existing work and no concept of overrextending a brand's value. The IW guys are interested in protecting the brand as a whole for the sake of the brand's future, while Activision is interested in milking what they can now, because they can always purchase something else that's huge down the road when they've ruined Modern Warfare's appeal with a half-dozen successively poorer-quality sequels.

I think this is what's up:West and Zampella want to retain control of the MW franchise so that they can take it away from IW. That's what the firings are about, and that's what the lawsuits are about. They had been shopping around to other publishers. Even if they weren't able to keep the MW franchise, they could always take the studio with them. Sure, Infiniti Ward might be owned by Activision now, but it is VERY common for studios to have mass employee exoduses so that those employees can start new studios. So they'd leave Activision with an empty shell and go make their own games in the worst case scenario. Which actually isn't that bad if they're not happy with their situation at Activision anyway. But ideally they'd be able to take the MW franchise with them. Again, IW are the guys who CREATED Call of Duty. They don't have control of the larger CoD franchise but they had some control of the MW offshoot, which is proving to be the more popular variation.

So we'll see where it goes.

Activision and EA are what's wrong with the gaming industry. It's ironic that Activision and Blizzard merged, because the two are polar opposites when it comes to quality control and release timeframes. Blizzard makes occasional super-high-quality AAAA releases and is richer than God from it. Activision, on the other hand, craps out 32353 games per day and buys everything it can get its contracts on. But at least EA is showing signs of learning how to develop unique, new ideas (Dead Space) where Activision is firmly entrenched in the "buy other peoples' ideas, then cut production costs in half and keep the retail price the same" camp.

A good detailed but concise article on the topic of IW v Activision:http://www.jakeworld.org/JakeW...rHere

I hope to Hell West and Zampella "win." They're real humans with real faces and real minds that develop genuinely interesting ideas. Activision's just a money factory looking for new fuel.

[infinitgkid]

Actually, I was getting at exactly the opposite: I think Activision is crooked and West and Zampella were simply prepared for the treachery. Activision has a poor reputation amongst gaming's well-informed anyway. They're like EA, they buy developers and IPs, then restructure until they've got people they want staffing those projects. They have no respect for pre-existing work and no concept of overrextending a brand's value. The IW guys are interested in protecting the brand as a whole for the sake of the brand's future, while Activision is interested in milking what they can now, because they can always purchase something else that's huge down the road when they've ruined Modern Warfare's appeal with a half-dozen successively poorer-quality sequels.

I think this is what's up:West and Zampella want to retain control of the MW franchise so that they can take it away from IW. That's what the firings are about, and that's what the lawsuits are about. They had been shopping around to other publishers. Even if they weren't able to keep the MW franchise, they could always take the studio with them. Sure, Infiniti Ward might be owned by Activision now, but it is VERY common for studios to have mass employee exoduses so that those employees can start new studios. So they'd leave Activision with an empty shell and go make their own games in the worst case scenario. Which actually isn't that bad if they're not happy with their situation at Activision anyway. But ideally they'd be able to take the MW franchise with them. Again, IW are the guys who CREATED Call of Duty. They don't have control of the larger CoD franchise but they had some control of the MW offshoot, which is proving to be the more popular variation.

My thoughts exactly...

This is your typical "cut out the middle man" situation. Although I have to say that EA is different in that they negotiate the contract into a more cost-effective agreement that works out for them. For example, look at Westwood Studios and the Command & Conquer franchise. That was the most bittersweet business decision IMO... why? Anyone remember a game called Earth and Beyond? If so, I'll rest my case there...

[MinisterofDOOM]

I could rant for months about EA ruining C&C. C&C3 and Kane's Wrath were excellent. However, C&C 4 might as well have just been named Generic Noob-Friendly Multiplayer Strategy Game. There's nothing C&C about it aside from the textures and cinematics. Red Alert 3 is the same way, it looks like RA but it sure as Hell doesn't play anything like it. And Generals was one of the most abominable repurposings of a respected name in the history of videogaming.

[bmike818]

.....are we going to get new MP maps or what?

LOL...Activision!

[MinisterofDOOM]

Yes.http://www.mapathy.com/

[Thamm]

To kinda get caught up with this:Activision Counter-sues.http://pc.ign.com/articles/108/1082894p1.html

Ex-IW Heads Join EA.http://ps3.ign.com/articles/108/1083051p1.html

[MinisterofDOOM]

I have a feeling West and Zampella are in for a rude awakening: EA is just as horrible as Activision, and is going to milk anything they create under contract with them in just as many ways.

Why not start your own studio WITHOUT ties to a major Evil Corporation? What on earth are they looking for that they can only find at EA? TONS of new developers have formed from the splinters of older, bigger ones without needing to turn to EA or Activision.Of course, when you're trying to make console games, you have to make certain concessions. The nature of the console market is much more controlled. On the PC side of things, it's much easier to self-publish or at least retain more control through Steam or Impulse. With consoles the need for a big publisher is greater.But even considering that, there are so many better options than EA, even if you're NOT fresh out of a broken partnership with the closest thing to EA that can be found.

I really don't see this going well at all. EA rarely does good things with purchased IPs and when they do the good things only last long enough to re-secure the IP's market value under the new label before being shoved in the Game-O-Matic for maximum profit. MW3 might be great, but MW4 will likely end up being more generic than cheddar cheese.

At any rate, I have no interest in COD or MW, so unless Respawn plans on doing something different, none of this means much to me. I wish they'd...you know...get adventurous and make something that's NOT a multiplayer-focused war shooter. How many MW games do we need before the setting becomes just as tiresome as the WWII era? How many different ways can you spin it? Where's the creativity?

Meh, whatever.

[ProudNissanFreak]

Maybe so, but imo EA makes a hell of a lot of better quality games than Activision and a wider genre of game as well. I'd take EA over Activision any day.

[MinisterofDOOM]

I definitely can't agree with either claim. And I wouldn't take either over the other...I'd just go somewhere else...which was my whole point.

[ProudNissanFreak]

Haha, I didn't read the whole thread, but I've been keeping up with the drama.

Getting ready for work :P

[RCA]

Who's left Infinity Ward so far?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRU5f-081LE

[ProudNissanFreak]

13 people including West and Zampella